Editorial mandates and restrictions

[GDB]

We've yet to see Spider-Man commit Murder One, even if it may make the world a better place (IE- killing Norman Osborn.)

He fed "The Other" to a bunch of birds, killing it/her.

[ShaggyB]

Can we send that line to Quesada inside a fortune cookie?

G.

too big. can you edited it to more than 10 words?

[ShaggyB]

He fed "The Other" to a bunch of birds, killing it/her.

as was pointed out to me... he says something to the lines of go back and give your master a message for me....

that being said if a demon dies on earth would it not go back to its demonic starting place? (Because thats the implication of said story.)

ps-

I too claimed that as him killing someone.... i was told that the above as the reason i was wrong by some more vocal anti bnd supporters.... do you buy it?

[Matt Linton]

Does it [or any other mandate, for the matter of it] get in the way of story enjoyment? That's going to depend on the individual.

I agree. Which is why I was arguing that Peter's relationships not ending in marriage is no more limiting or repetitive than Peter and MJ's marriage not ending.

[RDMacQ]

Peter and MJ are married. Some problem arises between them, but because they love each other they work through it.

Therefore, every Peter and MJ story is the same.

Break any story down far enough and it's the "same" as any other story.

True enough. However, I wasn't arguing that a married Peter and MJ are somehow fodder for far more stories than a single Peter. I was arguing that the idea that Peter has more stories, or that his stories are more diverse because he's single is partially false. As others have pointed out on this thread, while there may seem to be a lot of diversity it is really restricted by editorially mandates that prevent the relationship from developing beyond a certain point. It SEEMS that there is more options for storytelling, however this is just an elaborate smokescreen. Most of Peter's relationships won't allow anything more than a twist here and there to add flavor and color to the relationship but not much else. So if that is the case, then why not just accept it and have Peter and MJ remain married? We know that there is not going to be any development beyond a certain point, so why not accept it and allow the writers to focus on other aspects of the mythos.

I understand that Peter's relationships issues are appealing to some readers and creators. I do. However, people tend to ignore the fact that Peter has been in a lot of relationships over the years- a lot of which are easily forgotten. Look at the Deb Whitman example- Pete's relationship with Deb filled all the requirements for a "great" Spider-Man soap opera. Pete had to run out on her to be Spider-Man, there were some good dramatic developments as Deb seemingly deduced Pete's double life, Deb certainly was more of a fit for Peter than the Black Cat or MJ and their relationship was during the time of the Cobra/ Mister Hyde battle and Nothing Stops the Juggernaut. Yet Deb Whitman's character and her relationship with Peter is largely ignored by fans and creators alike. Why? Because Peter Parker is more than just his marital status, and his relationship problems are not in and of themselves fodder for endless stories. Sure there are some notable example- The Gwen/ Peter/ MJ love triangle was interesting because it was a nice Betty and Veronica style romance, with the guy ending up with the Veronica over the Betty. It was good for its time, but it didn't overstay its welcome. The Black Cat relationship was interesting because it inverted the norm, with Peter Parker being the impediment to Spider-Man's love life and not the other way around. And of course, there is MJ who is notable for not only being the most long lasting love interest but also Peter's wife. But aside from those three examples, what other relationship has Peter been in that has been of any note or interest?

People seem to think that if Peter is suddenly single, the glory days of the Gwen/ MJ/ Peter love triangle will return. That is, quite frankly, naive and narrow minded thinking. Peter being single doesn't mean his stories are going to be any better, or that it is somehow any more diverse than if he is married.

[Matt Linton]

I don't think it's guaranteed that any sort of glory days like Gwen/MJ/Peter will return, but his being single opens up the possibility that they will. They open up the possibility that there will be another MJ or another Black Cat or even another Deb - things that wouldn't have been possible if Stan had married off Peter and Gwen back in the 70s like he considered doing.

For me, it's all about potential. My early analogy with Spider-Man fighting Doc Ock every issue was to make the point that changing the players does add to the stories, whether it's different antagonists or different love interests. Peter, as a fictional protagonist, being tied to a single love interest is, to me, the same as Spider-Man fighting the same bad guy every issue. Sure, each fight might be slightly different, and maybe they'll try to add some variety to it by having the bad guy consider changing sides, or getting a power boost, or having Peter lose his powers, etc, etc, but it's still the same bad guy every time and (again, in fiction) that would get boring.

That's how I feel about Peter and MJ. I love MJ and think she's a great character (though I prefer her 60s/70s characterization, or the way she's written in SM<3MJ or USM) but the constant draw for me is Peter Parker and I want as much variety in his life to read about as possible.

[GDB]

I don't think it's guaranteed that any sort of glory days like Gwen/MJ/Peter will return, but his being single opens up the possibility that they will.

They could've brought Gwen back if they wanted to after HoM, and had a really interesting storyline start off of that. But they decided that it wasn't worth even mentioning post-HoM except once in the Son of M book.

[Matt Linton]

I think there are a few problems with bringing Gwen back, particularly then.

- Peter would have still been married to MJ, and it would have been pretty unimaginable that Peter Parker would either leave his wife for another woman, even Gwen, or be unfaithful to his wife. In that scenario it's an unbalance triangle.

- Using an actual Gwen/MJ/Peter triangle would have been much more "repeating the past" then anything that's happened in BND, and that complaint was hurled at nearly every story.

- Gwen being "the girl he lost" is, arguably, what makes her an interesting character in his life. Without that, she's basically Betty Brant.

[James Conniff]

They could've brought Gwen back if they wanted to after HoM, and had a really interesting storyline start off of that. But they decided that it wasn't worth even mentioning post-HoM except once in the Son of M book.

I'm so very glad they didn't bring her back. She was an okay character, but her classic death, the death of the first woman Peter ever loved,makes her character much more important.

And there's a perfectly good reason no one brought it up, Houseof M stuff was a pretty uncomfortable topic for everyone. And the heroes who knew that Peter was married to Gwen and happy wouldn't really bring that up to peter since the memory is probably very painful for him. I also don't see this as something Peter would bring up to Mary Jane.

[oldschool]

I'm so very glad they didn't bring her back. She was an okay character, but her classic death, the death of the first woman Peter ever loved,makes her character much more important.

And there's a perfectly good reason no one brought it up, Houseof M stuff was a pretty uncomfortable topic for everyone. And the heroes who knew that Peter was married to Gwen and happy wouldn't really bring that up to peter since the memory is probably very painful for him. I also don't see this as something Peter would bring up to Mary Jane.

I still beleve Gwen serves a much better purpose dead than she ever could alive. I liked her character a lot but her death is a constant reminder of the risks that Peter puts upon his loved ones; bringing her back negates that much as a resurrection of Uncle Ben would.

[GDB]

Peter would have still been married to MJ, and it would have been pretty unimaginable that Peter Parker would either leave his wife for another woman, even Gwen, or be unfaithful to his wife. In that scenario it's an unbalance triangle.

But he was married to Gwen in HoM, so they were technically both his wives.

Honestly, for all the complaining that people did that it was unrealistic that a seemingly irresponsible nerd (note the seemingly) like Peter would land a super-model wife such as MJ, it seems even more stupid to me that he'd have multiple hot girls fighting over him at the same time.

[RDMacQ]

I don't think it's guaranteed that any sort of glory days like Gwen/MJ/Peter will return, but his being single opens up the possibility that they will. They open up the possibility that there will be another MJ or another Black Cat or even another Deb - things that wouldn't have been possible if Stan had married off Peter and Gwen back in the 70s like he considered doing.

Sure, its possible that things could go back to the way they were if Peter was single. Its also possible that lead could spontaneously turn into gold, and I would get a date with Anne Hathaway. Its just not bloody likely. And I think it is unreasonable to reset the status quo because a writer COULD have the POSSIBILITY of REPEATING past glory. But for me, I would rather celebrate a creator doing something new and unexpected rather than something we've previously seen. The great thing about the initial story with MJ, Gwen and Peter is that you didn't know where it would go. People certainly didn't expect Gwen to die, and Pete to end up with MJ. And like it or not, the marriage kinda has that same unexpected quality to it, since the creators cannot simply rehash previous stories and are compelled to try new things. A new relationship MAY go down the path of the glory days with Gwen, MJ and Pete, but since the audience has been told that any relationship will eventually be broken up, doesn't it just dispel the illusion of any permanence? Won't the audience simply be looking to what will break the couple up rather than expect them to stay together.

[Matt Linton]

Maybe they will. But just like fans of the marriage can say, "We don't KNOW that they'll stay together because another editor might not have the same restrictions that Quesada does", the same is true for Peter being single. Somewhere down the line an EiC might decide that they really want Peter to marry, I don't know, Kitty Pryde or something. And then we'll get to see Peter Parker married to another superhero, dealing with mutant racism, having a wife who's dealt with the same stuff he's dealt with, and for just as long (and she started at a younger age than he did).

There ya go. Years of a brand new status quo that doesn't simply repeat the past. :)

Or maybe he marries a cop, and he's the one in the position to constantly worry about her safety, especially since she's out there fighting bad guys without the benefit of powers (and he saw what happened to George Stacy and Jean DeWolff). And maybe they struggle with his being a vigilante, and the effect on her career if it ever came out.

Or he's in a relationship for years (real time) with a woman who's also a photographer, but she travels all over the world on assignment. Sometimes he goes with her and we get "Spidey in Freedonia", and sometimes he stays at home and misses his girlfriend.

There's plenty that can be done with Peter Parker that doesn't revolve around the relationship ending (which is the only aspect of Peter dating that you seem to be focusing on).

And to the first point, I was using "glory days" in the same way you were - as a period of time that's thought of as being great (with Peter/MJ/Gwen as an example of that), not as repeating past glory days, but as creating new ones.

[GDB]

There ya go. Years of a brand new status quo that doesn't simply repeat the past. :)

There ya go, no reason to buy it then until JoeQ is ousted.

[RDMacQ]

Maybe they will. But just like fans of the marriage can say, "We don't KNOW that they'll stay together because another editor might not have the same restrictions that Quesada does", the same is true for Peter being single. Somewhere down the line an EiC might decide that they really want Peter to marry, I don't know, Kitty Pryde or something. And then we'll get to see Peter Parker married to another superhero, dealing with mutant racism, having a wife who's dealt with the same stuff he's dealt with, and for just as long (and she started at a younger age than he did).

There ya go. Years of a brand new status quo that doesn't simply repeat the past. :)

Or maybe he marries a cop, and he's the one in the position to constantly worry about her safety, especially since she's out there fighting bad guys without the benefit of powers (and he saw what happened to George Stacy and Jean DeWolff). And maybe they struggle with his being a vigilante, and the effect on her career if it ever came out.

Or he's in a relationship for years (real time) with a woman who's also a photographer, but she travels all over the world on assignment. Sometimes he goes with her and we get "Spidey in Freedonia", and sometimes he stays at home and misses his girlfriend.

There's plenty that can be done with Peter Parker that doesn't revolve around the relationship ending (which is the only aspect of Peter dating that you seem to be focusing on).

And to the first point, I was using "glory days" in the same way you were - as a period of time that's thought of as being great (with Peter/MJ/Gwen as an example of that), not as repeating past glory days, but as creating new ones.

Except Pete's never going to marry a cop. Date one, maybe, but not marry since he can't get married since it ages him. And since the whole point of Peter dating is to add "soap opera elements," there needs to be conflict with other parties. Hence the need for the dissolution of the marriage, because IF the writers CHOSE to introduce another love interest as a spoiler Pete can't be seen as cheating on his love interest.

He also won't have a relationship in real time, because that would also age him. Sure these are great points, but none that Marvel will ever explore because it goes against their editorial mandates for the character that we have seen passed down. The relationships HAVE to end, because Marvel won't let them grow beyond a certain point because it would "weaken" the characters appeal.

And why is it that people automatically assume that Peter has to be single for there to be a new "golden age" for the character? Most of the most fondly remembered stories are ones that were built on the running status quo, not ones that constantly went back and forth trying to recreate something from the past. Remember, Pete was married when Kraven's Last Hunt was told and Venom was introduced, so his marriage certainly didn't impede new concepts and new stories from being introduced into the books. Expecting Spider-Man to be an exact way before good stories can be told is the best way for good stories NOT to be told because it is artificially imposing restrictions on something that proves it doesn't need them to succeed.